Search

Objectives: Childhood trauma is common and associated with mental ill health. While high rates of trauma are observed across individual disorders, there is evidence that trauma is associated with an admixture of affective, anxiety and psychotic symptoms in adults. Given that early onset of mental disorder and trauma exposure herald poor outcomes, it is important to examine trauma prevalence rates in youth mental health services and to determine whether this trauma-related clustering is present in help-seeking young people. Methods: We used data from the Transitions Study, a longitudinal investigation of young people attending headspace youth mental health services in Australia between January 2011 and August 2012. Participants were 775 young people aged 12–25. Childhood trauma was assessed using the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire. Multinomial regression was used to assess whether reported childhood trauma was more strongly associated with the co-occurrence of depression, anxiety, mania and psychosis symptoms than with any one in isolation. Results: Approximately 84% of participants reported some form of abuse (emotional: 68%; physical: 32%; sexual: 22%) or neglect (emotional: 65%; physical: 46%). Exposure to multiple trauma types was common. Childhood trauma was significantly associated with each symptom domain. More severe childhood trauma was more strongly associated with the co-occurrence of symptoms than with any one symptom domain in isolation, such that more severely trauma-exposed young people were more likely to experience increased symptom clustering. Conclusions: Childhood trauma is pervasive in youth mental health services and associated with a symptom profile that cuts across traditional diagnostic boundaries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In the 1990s criteria were developed to detect individuals at high and imminent risk of developing a psychotic disorder. These are known as the at risk mental state, ultra high risk or clinical high risk criteria. Individuals meeting these criteria are symptomatic and help-seeking. Services for such individuals are now found worldwide. Recently Psychological Medicine published two articles that criticise these services and suggest that they should be dismantled or restructured. One paper also provides recommendations on how ARMS services should be operate. Methods: In this paper we draw on the existing literature in the field and present the perspective of some ARMS clinicians and researchers. Results: Many of the critics' arguments are refuted. Most of the recommendations included in the Moritz et al. paper are already occurring. Conclusions: ARMS services provide management of current problems, treatment to reduce risk of onset of psychotic disorder and monitoring of mental state, including attenuated psychotic symptoms. These symptoms are associated with a range of poor outcomes. It is important to assess them and track their trajectory over time. A new approach to detection of ARMS individuals can be considered that harnesses broad youth mental health services, such as headspace in Australia, Jigsaw in Ireland and ACCESS Open Minds in Canada. Attention should also be paid to the physical health of ARMS individuals. Far from needing to be dismantled we feel that the ARMS approach has much to offer to improve the health of young people. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]